To view this page ensure that Adobe Flash Player version 11.1.0 or greater is installed.

Either scripts and active content are not permitted to run or Adobe Flash Player version
11.1.0 or greater is not installed.

Professional Labels and Job Titles of SIOP Members Professional labels and job titles of SIOP members have evolved over the years. In this article we document cur- rently used labels and job titles and suggest some trends over time. Professional Labels Over the years the professional labels used in industrial -organizational psychology have changed. More recent labels are becoming more specific and accurate. Problem 1, Academics Versus Nonacademics Rob Silzer HR Assessment and Development Inc. Baruch College, Graduate Ctr, City University of New York In the 1970s, when I-O psychology was a fast growing field, most I-O psychologists at the time were in aca- demic positions. As I-O psychologists became more prevalent in consulting firms and business companies the academics adopted the labels “academic versus nonacademic” to describe the two groups. These pro- fessional terms persisted well into the 2000s, even the new IOP journal in 2008 was promoted as appealing to and representing both “academics and nonacademics.” In the last 5 to 10 years the number of “nonacademics” has grown substantially in SIOP (now representing at least half of SIOP members), and this group has become more vocal about not wanting to be labeled as a non- something by the academics. The term “practitioner” emerged as a short hand way of referring to the mem- bers who were not in academic positions. For many years the label was resisted by I-O academics and re- searchers who often saw “practitioners” as second class professionals who are not academics. Chad Parson Baruch College, Graduate Ctr, City University of New York The term “I-O Practitioner” is now more widely used and accepted. Even some academics have come around The Industrial Organizational Psychologist 87